No Tax at All

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Salty, Aug 23, 2009.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,131
    Likes Received:
    221
    Note: my post # 3

    On another thread when asked about tax, Aaron stated "Nope. I support NO income tax." Since there were not smilies such as " :smilewinkgrin: " , I assume he was serious.

    Wouldn't it be wonderful to have no tax?

    But as Hardsheller said "We're trying to have a serious talk here. I support NO income tax too but we both know that's an impossibility."

    So, what are some items
    A. that truly need funding
    B. that are optional
    C. that should be not be funded


    A. Highway dept, schools, reasonable pay for politicians (avg pay of constituents - might be a start)

    B. Parks, arts,

    C. Retirement pay for politicians, welfare,

    Salty
     
    #1 Salty, Aug 23, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 23, 2009
  2. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    Schools don't need federal funding. Only those with children in school should be paying the cost. It should be handled at the local community level.

    No pay needed for politicians. If they spent less time politicking, they've have more time to make money doing something else. There's no reason for them to be in session so much. Most of that is wasted time, voting on things that should never be introduced in the first place. If the federal government was as small as it should be, they could accomplish everything they needed to in 2 weeks a year.

    No funding at the federal level.

    No funding.


    What should be funded? Military (enough to defend our national borders) and infastructure.
     
  3. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,131
    Likes Received:
    221
    Sorry, this thread is not about leve -ie Federal, State, local but what govt should spend for
     
  4. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,680
    Likes Received:
    241
    A little truth in reporting would add significance to your posts. I said No income tax (I assume we're speaking of Federal taxes). I didn't say no tax at all.
     
  5. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    When speaking about what government should spend our tax dollars on, the level of government you are speaking of is very pertinent. There are items that federal government should never spend on, yet a very localized form of government (as small as a neighborhood school board) may well spend money on. The spending may differ from area to area since we are talking about local communities or neighborhoods deciding what they will do.

    On a whole, government spending should be a very small fraction of what it currently is.
     
  6. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,131
    Likes Received:
    221
    Matt,
    I agree 100% with what you said.

    We do need taxes - federal, State or Commonwealth and local. Unless the Constitution speaks of a subject - the the Feds should not spend any money. Otherwise it is a State or Commonwealth and/or local issue.

    And yes, all levels of govt spend way too much; but thats how politicians keep getting re-elected - its how much bacon they bring back from D.C. or the State or Commonwealth capital!

    I wish more would be like my friend, Charles Iavarone, the former Supervisor (mayor) of Salina, NY; refused his pay raise when he first took office!
     
  7. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    You get what you pay for. if politicians (representatives of the people in a republic) aren't paid what kind of representation would we have? Well, the congress would be filled with the independently wealthy. Could you afford to work without pay? Is that representative government? I would say not.
     
  8. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    In typical fashion, you totally ignore the portion of my post where I said that they should only need to work 2 weeks out of the year.

    Are you also saying that the people in government now aren't independently wealthy?
     
  9. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    >Are you also saying that the people in government now aren't independently wealthy?

    Mostly not when they start. Only when they leave office. <G>
     
  10. JPPT1974

    JPPT1974
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    4
    As much as I hate to say this, there is a thing called taxes for a reason. And that Uncle Sam needs to have his taxes, regardless.
     
  11. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    On what basis do you make the statement that congress should only work 2 weeks per year. I ignored it because it didn't make sense but maybe if could could support the statement it might make sense.
     
  12. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    If the federal government was as small as it should be, and only concerned about infastructure issues and the military, then there wouldn't be an agenda for more than 2 weeks a year. Right now, 95% of the time in congress is spent on issues that the federal government should never be dealing with.
     
  13. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amazingly the Bible even comments on this...

    Romans 13:1-7 NLT
    (1) Obey the government, for God is the one who put it there. All governments have been placed in power by God.
    (2) So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow.
    (3) For the authorities do not frighten people who are doing right, but they frighten those who do wrong. So do what they say, and you will get along well.
    (4) The authorities are sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for you will be punished. The authorities are established by God for that very purpose, to punish those who do wrong.
    (5) So you must obey the government for two reasons: to keep from being punished and to keep a clear conscience.
    (6) Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons. For government workers need to be paid so they can keep on doing the work God intended them to do.
    (7) Give to everyone what you owe them: Pay your taxes and import duties, and give respect and honor to all to whom it is due.
     
  14. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,131
    Likes Received:
    221
    I agree that the Feds are in areas that belong solely to the States or Commonwealths, but even I would say that 2 weeks is not enough time.
     
  15. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    As we all know...congress is full of middle-class folk.

    :rolleyes:
     
  16. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, people tend to get elected because they've excelled at something or are well known. About half of the Congress is made up of Lawyers. For these reasons i don't think there's much opportunity for the middle class to get elected.
     
  17. BigBossman

    BigBossman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,008
    Likes Received:
    0
    I realize that taxes are a part of life, that they are unavoidable, & that they are to some degree neccesary for a government's survival. I also agree with Jesus when he said, "Pay to Cesar what is his...". This of course was referring to paying taxes. What I don't agree with is what gives the government the right to say that its entitled to more than what it should get? I don't believe that the government should be allowed to get more in taxes because I got to put more hours in.

    I'm opposed to income tax, because it penalizes you for being successful. There needs to be a better way. I still believe in a national sales tax that replaces the income tax. There should be certain types of items exempt from this tax (food & clothing under a certain dollar amount to start with). This would allow people to control the amount of tax they pay by controlling their spending habits. This would also encourage people to save more, which is helpful when times are tough.
     
  18. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    >I still believe in a national sales tax that replaces the income tax. There should be certain types of items exempt from this tax (food & clothing under a certain dollar amount to start with).

    OK, as long as the death tax confiscates maybe 100% of everything over 100 times median pay else the working class will still pay 80% of their income to stay alive and the rich people will live on less than 10% of their annual increase.

    Say a guy inherits a million bucks. His annual increase is $60K of which he spends $12,000 a year because he has a good income on his own and isn't going to change his life. Every 10 years or so his net worth doubles. He lives 30 years and leaves 10 million to his kid who does the same and leave 100 million to his kid. Now, the guy who starts with 100 million and leaves a billion to his kid. . . .

    The working class guy who earns the median $40k or so leaves his kid a paid off house and enough cash to pay for the funeral and put 2 kids through college . . . maybe.

    In other words, median class people have median class estates as do their kids and their kids and their kids while the rich class, their kids get richer and richer and richer.

    Why do any of you working class people think that you or your kids will die anything but median class working people?
     
  19. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some might consider this odd coming from me but actually it's not. The answer to your question is because we live in America. My Dad worked in a factory but I went to college and earned a BS/MS in Engineering. After working for 35 years in that profession I'm definitely better off than he was.
     
  20. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    And, JustChristian, you've finally learned to spell Engineering as well! :laugh:

    I hate to say it, but I actually agree with your comment :).
     

Share This Page

Loading...